Revisionism in Biology and Medicine: HIV Does Not Exist ii

by **rerevisionist** » 04 May 2011 01:11

Just a cautionary point: the reason HIV can't exist is because AIDS itself isn't a properly defined disease. It's a result of a combination of drugs, and repeat multiple anal sex. If someone ends with Kaposi's sarcoma from opening poppers in front of their face, plus syphilis, plus infections caused by faecal matter in the bloodstream, plus opportunistic infections caused by the different parts of the immune system not working properly, plus abnormal body chemistry caused by injections, obviously it's absurd to expect a virus to cause it - just as if you have frostbite, broken limbs, alcoholism and abrasions caused by extreme skiing accidents it's not caused by a virus. (The above doesn't apply to Africa - AIDS tests look for blood protein, so Africans with blood infections, malaria, I believe some forms of sickle-cell anaemia, malnutrition and so on may test positive for the tests - which are openly known not to be reliable).

This doesn't mean there aren't viruses and in fact these were first found in plants, such things as tobacco mosaic virus, where an active ingredient was found to pass through filters which would remove all bacteria. (Assuming they got the experiemnt right..)

by **voerioc** » 04 May 2011 07:56

About tobacco virus, I think the experiments made during the late 1800's mean nothing. Because I think it's quite easy to obtain this result in plants like that. The problem of mosaic disease is in fact a problem of dehydration. The tobacco plant is under a burning sun. So, it can be dehydrated quite easily. Then, spots of dehydration appear naturally. It has nothing to do with a virus.

So I think many things could produce such a result. When leaves are dehydrated by the heat of the sun, if you inject anything (or almost anything) with a needle into a leaf, it will provoke a trauma in the leaf, at the point of injection, and the defense mechanism of the leaf will lead to the creation of such a spot. This is why you can obtain the same result again and again. But of course, this kind of control experiment has never been done.

Thus the experiment is biased by the use of a needle. The real experiment should be to spray the virus on the leaves and the ground. However, since the spots are caused by the dehydration of the plant, you would always obtain some results. So, if you believe in the virus, and you don't make any control experiment, you will always have results which will confirm your beliefs. But if you make control experiments, you will see that the problem doesn't come from a virus, because you can obtain the same results with many other matters.

by **rerevisionist** » 04 May 2011 12:11

Voerioc, thanks for that. The work of Harold Hillman shows that lack of control experiments has been habitual in biology. However he didn't investigate virology with any thoroughness, though he did state the 'rocket ship' virus picture form the 1960s and similar related ones, all showing the identical orientation (arrowhead type things all arranged around the cell section) are artefacts.

However with plant viruses it's stated that a filtered solution shows a strange silky sheen, which is 'unmistakable'. But now you mention it, I'm not sure if they claim that, if you do the same thing with an unaffected leaf (or a dehydrated leaf), you don't get the same silky sheen.

Is there someone equivalent to Hillman, in virus research? Are you saying Stefan Lanka is by far the leading virus revisionist?

by **FirstClassSkeptic** » 04 May 2011 13:58

The virus survives in the seeds, on plant debris, in the soil and the mould.

http://www.inra.fr/hyp3/pathogene/6tmv.htm

So why couldn't the virus be something created by the plant?

I've had tomatoes look like this:

http://vegetablemdonline.ppath.cornell. ... om_TMV.htm

I didn't know why, but it happened in hot, dry weather.

by **voerioc** » 04 May 2011 17:13

rerevisionist wrote:Is there someone equivalent to Hillman, in virus research? Are you saying Stefan Lanka is by far the leading virus revisionist?

Yes, among known people, Lanka is by far the leading virus revisionist, since he says that no pathogenic virus has ever been properly isolated.

However, I think I go farer than him, since he still believes in viruses (he claims to have isolated one in an algae). Whereas I think they are just cellular waste, only debris.

I think viruses have been invented because there was a mass hysteria about pathogenic germs during the late 1800's, and there was illnesses which they thought were caused by pathogenic germs but where they couldn't find any visible germ. Thus, instead of thinking it wasn't contagious diseases, they invented the concept of virus. After that, they were obliged to confirm this invention in order to not be ridiculed.

And, as Nukelies I believe that the entire contagious theory is bullshit. Of course, bacteria exist, but they are almost never pathogenic.

by **FirstClassSkeptic** » 29 May 2011 02:18

OK, now explain this:

Under cross-examination Friday by Crown attorney Karen Shea, Aziga admitted that by having unprotected sex with 11 women and not telling them he was HIV positive, he exposed them to the virus. Seven of those women became infected, with two of them dying of AIDS-related cancers.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadi ... Id=6975755

by **nogoodendinsight** » 07 Aug 2011 18:35

Hi nukelies, hi Rae

My first post. I really took my time reading everything on this website to find out if it was another scam. What y'all seem to have understood by now is that, if there's a jew behind something, it's not to be trusted. The Manhattan Project timeline alone had me howling with laughter.

There is a real doctor, he is German, his name is Ryke Geerd Hamer. As soon as his name gets mentioned in any forum whatsoever the ADL shills attack him in their uniquely ridiculous holohoax style.

Hamer wrote several books. They are not sold by Amazon and other chosenite outfits. In one of these books called ''AIDS, the illness that does not exist'' he not only delineates his findings of the real workings of the human body, he has - after thirty years of being hounded by the medical community - a thorough grasp of that community's being bought and paid for by the king of the child sacrificers, David Rockefeller. There was an article in Haaretz and other rags claiming that most jews were immune to AIDS due to a genetic defect (so incest is good for you after all). All the laboratories doing HIV-testing are in jewish hands. Gallo and Montagnier - he of the hebrew accent - make a lot of money selling HIV-tests which by their own statements are useless. One day you do it, it's positive, the next day you do it and it turns out negative. The reason for this: it's a very basic allergy test which will even turn out positive if you have a light case of hay fever. If you have an strong aversion against something, it's likely to be positive as well. The mechanisms of the interactions between brain and body are not to be known by the goyim.

Hamer found out how the human body goes about treating affliction with so-called ''special programs'' which show up on cranial CTs! With the same intensity that the medical shills attack him, his findings are being used in the treatment of chosen ones. Here in Europe, of those who get cancer approximately 96 percent die, if they're not jewish. In Israel where there are separate doctors for jews and Arabs the rate for jews is approximately FOUR percent!!! In Europe and the US, people don't die of cancer, they die of fear and chemotherapy.

The same is true about AIDS: all those nasty symptoms like Kaposi's Sarkoma, blindness, strokes, liver failure are direct results of AZT or the newer stuff which is just as toxic. The good doctors make loads of money poisoning human beings. Approximately thirty conditions which have been known for quite some time have been rebranded AIDS and used as a culling device to send those so marked to their poison death. They don't have that non-existing virus, they either have the same deadly hobbies which make short work of their immune system, or they are of African-American extraction. Doctors in the US get something like $ 2000 for each and every new diagnosis of AIDS. Talk about incentives.

As I think there are no official translations of Dr Hamer's books I could do some, not for the money because these books - as I already said - are not carried by Amazon and other holohoax profiteers, but to get the message out. Hamer is attacked viciously by those using his findings; they already have a candidate ready to claim Dr Hamer's work as his, as Dr Hamer is already 75.

And perhaps you found these various websites yourself where they offer money for a photo of the AIDS virus taken under reproducible scientific conditions. It is not possible to make a picture of living cells with the methods paraded in front of us, no matter what kind of DIsney animations they put out. The fact that no one has yet claimed the money, not even our money-addicted friends, says more than all the Gallo/Montagnier propaganda taken together.

Your links to Harold Hillman's films do not work, the pages are not found, which does not astonish me at all. On a Springer Press site I found a copy of one of his books for US $ 733, another form of censorship.
Where might I find the film?

by **rerevisionist** » 07 Aug 2011 19:26

Hi nogoodendinsight!

*** You have in fact posted before - you must have forgotten, tho' I remembered your nickname. In fact, here it is -- 'Japan's PM Says Nuclear Situation 'Very Grave'
http://www.big-lies.org/nuke-lies/www.nukelies.com/forum/was-fukushima-dangerous.html

*** This site is not a scam, fraud, or hoax - it's entirely serious.

*** Interesting about 'AIDS' and Jews, which I wondered about more than ten years ago. I don't think I'd known that Montagnier believes himself a Jew, if you're right. I also didn't know that 'AIDS' labs are in the hand of jews (I copy your lower-case here). None of the 'AIDS' sceptics I've heard of, or met, have commented on a Jewish connection - but then physicists, historians etc don't either in analogous cases.

*** I think you may have mentioned Ryke Geerd Hamer (of 'Germanic New Medicine') before - I've certainly vaguely heard of him. No publications seem to be online - I'd have been interested to hear his detailed comments on AIDS, to see if he came up with some new approach. Having typed that, I found an account of his ideas - he says 'AIDS' is an allergy test to smegma - which sounds new to me!

*** Without commenting in detail, comments online remind me of things like iridiagnosis, where there's supposed to be a link to parts of the body - except that Hamer uses the newer technique of computerised tomography for his supposed comparison. If it's true that his ideas help cure cancer - or prevent people killing themselves with dangerous 'treatments' as with 'AIDS' - I hope there are proper statistical investigations, though I couldn't see any online.

_________________
There's a forum thread on this site about Harold Hillman's work
http://www.big-lies.org/nuke-lies/www.nukelies.com/forum/index.html" ?f=5&t=199
I'll comment there re Hillman.

by **Sorensen731** » 07 Aug 2011 19:50

Interesting, thanks for the links, I heard of Peter Duesberg before, and several explanation of AIDS as nutritional-emotional illness.

Another similar author I heard recently, Royal Raymond Rife, I haven't dig him more, or this links, but may be promising too.

http://uninvasive.com/rife-technology
http://www.rifeforum.com/

At http://www.abebooks.com/ I did find a few of his books still available, maybe there not the big ones...

I remember reading about Bechamp and his fight with Pasteur's Germ Theory. It may go deeper back to the past.

Russian Kozyrev started his investigations after looking at spiraling plants detecting a hidden but necessary energy there.

by **rerevisionist** » 07 Aug 2011 22:48

I wouldn't bother with the 'Rife microscope'. From memory, he tried to examine one microscope image with another microscope, obviously not likely to work; and he ended up with a thing with huge numbers of moving parts.

Bechamp however seems a more serious person - or, if you prefer, Pasteur seems less impressive than the usually presented image. (I wonder if Pasteur was a jew?.... lol). Bechamp again from memory thought bacteria were by products of disease, not the other way round. I'd have thought that Koch's postulates completely demolished that aspect of Bechamp, though. (Apologies about the lack of acute accent over the e!)

by **Sorensen731** » 07 Aug 2011 23:13

Thanks, time saved. Of Bechamp I had Blood and it's Third Elemente, which I haven't started yet.

Revisionism in Biology and Medicine: HIV Does Not Exist ii

Re: HIV Does Not Exist

Re: HIV Does Not Exist

Re: HIV Does Not Exist

Re: HIV Does Not Exist

Re: HIV Does Not Exist

Re: Fundamental Revisionism in Biology: HIV Does Not Exist

Re: Fundamental Revisionism in Biology: HIV Does Not Exist

Re: Fundamental Revisionism in Biology: HIV Does Not Exist

Re: Fundamental Revisionism in Biology: HIV Does Not Exist

Re: Fundamental Revisionism in Biology: HIV Does Not Exist

Re: Fundamental Revisionism in Biology: HIV Does Not Exist

Who is online